Reposted: Originally Published May 30, 2018
A few days ago, we reported on a survey of Dartmouth student’s that questions their tolerance and diversity when it comes to dating, befriending, or just interacting with someone who has opposing political beliefs. There were no surprises. Democrats shunned the idea while Republicans were much more accepting.
Further down in the same survey were data about how these students view Free Speech on campus.
The survey also showed contrasts how Republican and Democratic students view free speech, finding that 63 percent of Democrats believe free speech at Dartmouth is “very/somewhat secured,” whereas 69 percent of Republicans felt that free speech at Dartmouth is “very/somewhat threatened.”
Keep in mind that Ivy League Schools like Dartmouth (institutions controlled by the far-left with very little ideological diversity – which limits intellectual diversity) are considered the mills from which future leaders are crafted.
The policies affecting speech are written and enforced by the people who want little or nothing to do with ideas outside a claustrophobic Democrat-Socialist worldview that punishes any deviation from approved dogma.
This is not surprising because bias reporting, diversity tribunals, outbursts, open-intolerance, even the riots that plague campuses begin with the left and their cultural Iron Dome against the peaceful expression of ideas they decide are toxic.
They decide. They or theirs then act to suppress words and ideas so that others might not hear. Diversity of race, sex, or gender need not apply.
These water-carriers of oppression don’t see the downside to their acts of tyranny. We know they don’t. They call themselves the resistance. Resistance to an open and free society? Sure.
Dartmouth Democrats are told that silencing opposing speech is necessary to secure the political landscape. For what?
Tyranny, dummy.
Intimidating others into silence is ideological cleansing. It ends debate. Builds the one-party state where letting your mind wander off the plantation has consequences.
By any means necessary.
This is mainstream thought on the left and at Dartmouth. Professor Mark Bray (with the support of more than 100 Dartmouth Professors), insists that violence to suppress speech (they oppose) is not just acceptable, it is necessary.
A contention that has to-date failed to trigger elected Democrats and party leaders into denouncing it. They have not because they cannot.
New Hampshire Democrats, as committed advocates of Antifaschistische Aktion, can no more denounce in real terms the violence of Antifa than they can abortion, amnesty, unions, or any centralization of power and money needed to fuel their government-first addictions.
So, these Dartmouth poll results are reflective of Democrat party policy. Again, not at all surprising.
What would be surprising is if Republicans revisited this in an election year every time a Democrat tries to control the narrative.
Democrat: “Blah Blah Women’s Health Care, Blah Blah Guns…”
Republican: “If you are such a defender of ‘women’s or minority rights’ why won’t you denounce the use or sanction of violence as a tool of intimidation to suppress peaceful first amendment expression against people of color, homosexuals, and women?” (Something like that.) And while you’re at it, make sure you challenge them on all this #Resistance rubbish.
They get away with too much. Don’t let them off the hook for that too.
Now, get out there and have some fun.
Originally Published May 30, 2018
